The Pablo Picasso Alzheimer's Therapy

NY Times ^ | October 30, 2005 | RANDY KENNEDY

[neverdem]

SITTING the other day in front of Picasso's rapturous "Girl Before a Mirror" at the Museum of Modern Art, Rueben Rosen wore the dyspeptic look of a man with little love for modern art. But the reason he gave for disliking the painting was not one you might expect to hear from an 88-year-old former real estate broker.

"It's like he's trying to tell a story using words that don't exist," Mr. Rosen said finally of Picasso, fixing the painter's work with a critic's stare. "He knows what he means, but we don't."

This chasm of understanding is one that Mr. Rosen himself stares into every day. He has midstage Alzheimer's disease, as did the rest of the men and women who were sitting alongside him in a small semicircle at the museum, all of them staring up at the Picasso.

It was a Tuesday, and the museum was closed, but if it had been open other visitors could have easily mistaken the group for any guided tour. Mr. Rosen and his friends did not wear the anxious, confused looks they had worn when they first arrived at the museum. They did not quarrel in the way that those suffering from Alzheimer's sometimes do. And when they talked about the paintings, they did not repeat themselves or lose the thread of the discussion, as they often do at the long-term care home where most of them live in Palisades, N.Y.

At one point, a member of the tour, Sheila Barnes, 82, a quick-witted former newspaper editor who suffers from acute short-term memory loss...

[Dark Skies]

Thx for your response. Looking back, I think I started "A Brief History of Time" but got distracted or something and never got into it. On your recommendation, I will try again.

[Dark Skies]

And by the way, the reason I found Krauthammer's comment intriguing is that, before getting into the political world, he was chief resident of Psychiatry at Mass General and received his M.D. at Harvard (in 1975). He is quite scientific oriented and I was shocked that he would make such a statement about "A Brief History of Time."

Check his bio sometime...he has an interesting background.

[Republicanprofessor]

The dreaded red X has surfaced instead of Murray. Let me try again and hope that it stays.

The bright colors and surrealistic exuberance of the table are in stark contrast to how many would think of spillage, which is to think of waste and loss. I suspect the artist is illustrating that it is in our imperfections that our humanity shines forth, so she celebrates the dynamism of the spillage, rather than suggest that we grieve it.

Your interpretation is very good. She often does these body-like reaching tables and cups holding fluids that do often spill out. I also see the fluid as the soul; perhaps the cup is the heart. And the warm, liquid shape is in great contrast to the harder edges of the table. She is invigorating domestic forms (usually the realm of women) with much more imagination and power than we've seen in much contemporary art.

The exhibition is at the Museum of Modern Art through Feb. 9 and then travels to Spain. See it if you are in the area; it's a great show. You are right about many critics, and I think maybe even curators and dealers. They follow fashionable trends; it's easier than thinking about form and content (my criteria for art: what's it mean and how is that relayed). And shocking has been in for many decades, even though many of us are sick of this easy way out.

You are also right about Pollock's work being great because it is natural. (A very picky point: Pollock ends in -ock not -ack. Don't feel badly: I made worse mistake. One of my friends' name is Pollack and I spelt it with an o for ages!!)